It also benefits in a security sense as attackants can’t target a computer directly, they have to first get past the router.

Cons

Network Address Translation does not allow a true end-to-end connectivity that is required by some real time applications. A number of real-time applications require the creation of a logical tunnel to exchange the data packets quickly in real-time. It requires a fast and seamless connectivity devoid of any intermediaries such as a proxy server that tends to complicate and slow down the communications process.

NAT creates complications in the functioning of Tunneling protocols. Any communication that is routed through a Proxy server tends to be comparatively slow and prone to disruptions. Certain critical applications offer no room for such inadequacies. Examples include telemedicine and teleconferencing. Such applications find the process of network address translation as a bottleneck in the communication network creating avoidable distortions in the end-to-end connectivity.

NAT acts as a redundant channel in the online communication over the Internet. The twin reasons for the widespread popularity and subsequent adoption of the network address translation process were a shortage of IPv4 address space and the security concerns. Both these issues have been fully addressed in the IPv6 protocol. As the IPv6 slowly replaces the IPv4 protocol, the network address translation process will become redundant and useless while consuming the scarce network resources for providing services that will be no longer required over the IPv6 networks.

Option 3: Using RIP

Rip is a distance routing protocol, is more flexible that using static routers and necessary if the number of subnets grows. Do you want to fight against hundred of rules? or assume the risk of downtime’s created by a router malfunction?

install zebra

permanent:

edit the /etc/zebra/ripd.conf file

redistribute connected

version 2

ip rip authentication string “max 16 characters”

router rip
network 10.10.0.0/24
network 200.3.107.200/24

pros

Easy to configure and use

V2 supports VLSM and CIDR

cons

Converges slowly on large networks

Doesn’t recognize bandwidth of links

Doesn’t support multiple paths for the same route

Routing updates can require significant bandwidth because the entire routing table is sent

Prone to routing loops

Option 4: Using OSPF (Open Shortest Path First)

OSPF is a routing protocol that uses the Dijkstra algorithm for get the quickest way. into a set of subnets where the routers are connected at different speeds could work better than R.I.P.

OSPF can be logically segmented by using areasnot as easy to learn as some other protocols

if an entire network is running OSPF, and one link within it is “bouncing” every few seconds, then OSPF updates would dominate the network by informing every other router every time the link changed state.